5 reviews
This is an amazing series! I show this series to my high school history class and they are captivated by the stories of these men. One of the reviews was so negative it was sickening (show some respect for the veterans of World War II). My dad was a World War II vet and he fought in the Battle of the Bulge. I would rather show this series than "Saving Private Ryan," or the "Band of Brothers." While, the production is better, after watching the "World War II: The Last Heroes," I felt like I experienced what is was truly like during those battles. I highly recommend this series!
I've watched hundreds and hundreds of documentaries on military history and I've read as many books. From a Historian perspective, you probably won't like this series ... it's not a dissection of strategies, exploration of leadership styles, or meticulously detailed analysis of anything (the thing we historians love). What this is is simply this ... it's an effort to give a voice to some of the last living WWII combat veterans before there are none left. That's it ... and that's okay. Sure, this series could have been told with half the number of episodes (a lot of the footage is repeated) ... but the producers/directors are trying to paint a picture and the footage is only one color on their canvas; and like a painting, colors are often repeated.
What this series is ideal for ... is the modern generation. It's short, visual, and emotional that introduces more WWII history than is currently taught in the public schools. Every High School should show this series ... with signed parental authorization, of course (ironically, boys the same age today would need permission slips to watch the movie ... whereas 70+ years ago, boys of the same age, were living it); that is, if you can break them away from the Kardassians, Survivor and Facebook.
What this series is ideal for ... is the modern generation. It's short, visual, and emotional that introduces more WWII history than is currently taught in the public schools. Every High School should show this series ... with signed parental authorization, of course (ironically, boys the same age today would need permission slips to watch the movie ... whereas 70+ years ago, boys of the same age, were living it); that is, if you can break them away from the Kardassians, Survivor and Facebook.
- majekcarter
- Jul 14, 2015
- Permalink
- YohjiArmstrong
- Nov 7, 2011
- Permalink
The super close ups of the faces of people being interviewed is really annoying in this series.
The viewer doesn't need to see the eye of a person fill up the entire monitor screen. Nor does it help to show the close up of the inside of the nostrils of someone as they are telling their story.
Somehow the director or editor must have thought that this technique was innovative, because it's used every 2 minutes in the first two episodes. I'm not about to watch the 3rd.
They need to get a clue and just show us the veterans speaking like they're sitting in a room. Not like the viewer is sitting on their lap trying to examine how many nose hairs they have. Fortunately, they do pan away every once in a while a show the vet at a practical distance.
This probably could have been a good documentary of the account of the veterans experience but the inane close up techniques make it very boring very quick.
I had to stop watching, not because their stories weren't interesting but because of the trite attempt of whatever it was these super closeup shots and their redundant occurrence were trying to achieve.
I'd truly like to know, what the director or editor was thinking when they added this feature, or if they even knew that it was occurring as they filmed the interviews with the surviving veterans.
They must have known, and I would like to know what they thought might be so interesting in looking into full blown nostrils, mouths and iris's of eyeballs.
The viewer doesn't need to see the eye of a person fill up the entire monitor screen. Nor does it help to show the close up of the inside of the nostrils of someone as they are telling their story.
Somehow the director or editor must have thought that this technique was innovative, because it's used every 2 minutes in the first two episodes. I'm not about to watch the 3rd.
They need to get a clue and just show us the veterans speaking like they're sitting in a room. Not like the viewer is sitting on their lap trying to examine how many nose hairs they have. Fortunately, they do pan away every once in a while a show the vet at a practical distance.
This probably could have been a good documentary of the account of the veterans experience but the inane close up techniques make it very boring very quick.
I had to stop watching, not because their stories weren't interesting but because of the trite attempt of whatever it was these super closeup shots and their redundant occurrence were trying to achieve.
I'd truly like to know, what the director or editor was thinking when they added this feature, or if they even knew that it was occurring as they filmed the interviews with the surviving veterans.
They must have known, and I would like to know what they thought might be so interesting in looking into full blown nostrils, mouths and iris's of eyeballs.
- normangrochowski
- Jun 23, 2016
- Permalink